[Sca-cooks] Redaction

[David Friedman]

I don't think any of these terms really fits.

"Redaction" seems to imply changing the words, not adding additional 
information, such as quantities determined by trial and error.

"Working recipe" suggests to me an intermediate stage, such as the 
"working title" of the book I'm currently writing--which will 
probably change eventually to a final title.

"Adapted" suggests to me a recipe which has been altered to fit modern tastes.

I sometimes refer to a "worked out recipe," but I'm not sure that's any better.

>When I did my column for TI back in 1980-1982 and my cookbook in 
>1982, I used "working recipe"
>which I've always liked. We also used "adapted" back in those long 
>long ago days.
>
>Back in 2002 on this list the topic came up and we had this mention:
>
>Also sprach rose@:
>>So are we really redacting when we take a period recipe and write it out in a
>>familiar, modern format?  It's not really editing -- the new recipe is an
>>original work, isn't it?  My version is almost never going to be identical to
>>anyone else's.  Is translate a better word?  What else is there?
>>
>>Rose
>
>This question comes up fairly frequently on this list. I prefer
>"adapt" or "rework" [for the modern kitchen].
>
>Adamantius
>-------------
>There was also a major discussion on this list about the use of the 
>term "redaction" back in August/September 2003.
>
>from August 31st, 2003
>The definition of redaction is one of those subjects which has come up
>before.
>
>In terms of period cookbooks, it refers to the process of editing and
>revising the work into a more usable form for a modern audience, which may
>include editing the recipes to a more modern standard.  I prefer the words
>adaptation and interpretation as more accurately describing the modern
>preparation or editing of historic recipes.
>
>Bear
>
>>
>>I have since learned that my definition of redaction was
>>incorrect.  Figures!  I had never heard the word before it came up in a
>>SCA context.  Never heard it in my non-SCA foodways experience.  I
>>checked the OED the other day and the word's current use is specifically a
>>text reproduction of process.  Important lesson here, learn the meaning
>>of a new word before you use it? :)
>>
>>--
>>Ron Carnegie
>
>Also on the 31st August, this was posted in response to Ron C's post--
>
>Yeah, well, on this list (and in the SCA) we have our own meaning 
>for words. We're not quite as arbitrary as Humpty Dumpty in "Alice", 
>but...
>
>So, "redaction" in this context means working up a (generally 
>reusable) modern recipe from an historical recipe.
>
>And "documentation" tends to mean documenting all the steps in the 
>process of making something, including historical information about 
>whatever it is, and including an organized and fairly detailed 
>description of how we did it and why.
>
>These are not necessarily the way these words are used outside the SCA...
>
>Anahita
>
>----
>On September 20th 2003--
>>Also sprach Phlip:
>>>Adaptation has the implication of deliberately making changes to the recipe
>>>(more salt and sugar, for "modern" tastes, maybe?)
>>
>>Certainly adaptation is change. But are we changing the dish or the 
>>recipe? Certainly the intent is the latter, and the former, in 
>>theory, is what we're _not_ after.
>>
>>So I have no problem with "adaptation". If you look at recipes in 
>>cookbooks that come from famous chefs, often there'll be a little 
>>fine-print credit saying "adapted by" so-and-so; what that means is 
>>that the 60-serving recipe meant to be cooked in the convection 
>>oven has been altered to produce a dish similar to that chef's 
>>signature dish, but which can easily be prepared at home for 4 
>>people. Whether that constitutes changing the actual dish, 
>>substantially, is open to debate.
>>
>>Adamantius
>
>But that  isn't what we are doing. What we call a redaction is an 
>original recipe plus additional information--"if you do it this way 
>it comes out tasty." It's a conjectural reconstruction, not an 
>adaptation.
>
>An adaptation would be if you had the recipe for cooking over an 
>open fire and converted it into "so many minutes on the stove at 
>medium" and the like.
>--
>David/Cariadoc
>
>---
>
>We hashed through the subject pretty thoroughly at that time.
>
>
>Johnnae
>
>On Jan 24, 2011, at 12:02 AM, Deborah Hammons wrote:
>
>>I have been looking up just "when" we the SCA started using the word
>>redaction for our "version" of a recipe.  I have to say some of the
>>dictionary definitions have me wondering if we really should be using it.
>>So, I am throwing it out to the list.
>>
>>I was hoping to teach a class on "redacting" recipes at a collegium.  I
>>welcome any and all comment.
>>
>>Aldyth
>_______________________________________________
>Sca-cooks mailing list
>Sca-cooks at lists.ansteorra.org
>http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/sca-cooks-ansteorra.org


-- 
David/Cariadoc
www.daviddfriedman.com